MILITARY HISTORY ONLINE

User:    Password:

 
Civil War Commanders and Units
Author
Message
Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan
MI USA
Posts: 5492

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 7/23/2019 9:30:51 PM

Surprisingly these historians pick Longstreet's wounding!? Check out the video & comment??

[Read More]

What say you?
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan
MI USA
Posts: 5492

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 7/30/2019 10:32:52 AM

Here is one perspective on the effect of Stonewall Jackson's loss!

[Read More]

What's your take on it?

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 7/30/2019 4:08:56 PM

What would you rather lose : your right arm or your warhorse ?

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 7/31/2019 11:26:48 AM

Of Gettysburg it was said “ Jackson was not there. “

Did Lee say that ?

If he did, then I think we have our answer, don’t you ?

Regards, Phil

----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 7/31/2019 12:11:00 PM

Phil,

Lee didn't say it.
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 7/31/2019 12:24:14 PM

John,

Somewhere those words have been written as a chapter heading in a volume on Lee. I can’t remember where I saw it. : possibly Southall Freeman or Dowdey. It was definitely about Gettysburg, and it conveyed the implication that Lee said it.


I must check.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 7/31/2019 12:45:53 PM

Phil,

I believe it first appeared in a quote from a un-named officer in a Richmond newspaper.

But the thing is even if Lee said it, it doesn't come off as a slight to Longstreet but to Ewell and Hill who in effect replace Jackson.
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 7/31/2019 1:57:55 PM

John,

Once again it seems that memory has played me false ; or that I rely on fragments and impressions from books that I’ve read, as if clutching at straws.

But this I did find, in Southall Freeman’s Lee, volume III, page 161 :

And one afternoon, when he was out riding with Professor White, he said quietly If I had had Stonewall Jackson with me, so far as man can see, I should have won the battle of Gettysburg. That statement must stand. The darkest scene in the great drama of Gettysburg was enacted at Chancellorsville when Jackson fell.

It is no slight to Longstreet to argue that Jackson’s death was more fatal to the Confederacy than was Longstreet’s wounding .

I have to say that, when I watched that interesting discussion that Dave posted as a link, it seemed to me that the guys were being deliberately controversial - almost contrarian - in espousing the view that Longstreet’s wounding was the more serious blow to the South. Did they really mean it ; or were they just stirring up a controversy ? All honour to them , though.....it gives me pause to reconsider, and that is no bad thing.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 7/31/2019 10:45:13 PM

Phil,

First the quote itself. There were at least three version of this published when it first came to the public with this being the least bombastic and most Lee like.(it even says so in Freeman's notes) There are two different men named White who supposedly became good friends with Lee after the war. Then there is when and where which is "out riding" and in the last months of his life but then we have quotes from his daughter Margaret that on their trip to visit the grave of her sister Annie who died during the war in North Carolina that he couldn't walk more than 30 feet without having to stop and rest. Then that the trip and all the attention took it out of him.

If Jackson is there and takes the high ground at the end of Day ` as I'm sure he would have yes Lee wins at Gettysburg but what does he win? Meade isn't going to fight he's going to retreat. So what does Lee win and what can he do so far from his source of reinforcement and resupply with 4 and maybe 5 chewed up divisions and a third less ammo.(remember they were just about out of ammo when they reached the Potomic at Falling Waters on the retreat)

If Longstreet rolls up Hancock he's into the supply trains and the AOP is going to lose hundreds of wagons and teams. Grant isn't going to be able to just do a flank march and start again because he's not going to have the transport for his supplies. If the AOP hasn't even come close to Petersburg with higher casualties is even the fall of Atlanta enough to win the election? If Lincoln loses in 64?
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/1/2019 4:03:29 AM

John,

You present an interesting interpretation here.

What this amounts to is not so much the question as to whether Jackson or Longstreet were the more valuable to the Confederacy, as to whether the effects of a crushing rebel victory at the Wilderness were going to be more decisive than those won by a southern triumph at Gettysburg.

More a question of the hour, than of the man ?

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/1/2019 4:51:40 AM

John,

My God ! My God ! What will the country say ?

So Lincoln exclaimed after Chancellorsville.

Imagine a heavy defeat on home soil, at Gettysburg : what would the country say then ?

I take your point about Lee’s logistical predicament......it would be difficult to pursue and exploit.

Would that have been necessary ? The ramifications of such a defeat on Lincoln’s presidency would in themselves have been enough, I suspect , to put the administration in existential crisis, especially when those riots broke out in New York.

Counter factual scenario : Jackson lives, the yankees are driven from the field, Lee withdraws to Virginia with fewer than ten thousand casualties instead of twenty five thousand : no PPT debacle, a humiliating yankee defeat on Union soil.....what a statement to send out to the world !

I won’t even begin to imagine what a bigger detachment sent out West might achieve : I’m sure you’ll jump on me and tell me that Bragg would snatch defeat from the jaws of victory ! Chickamauga magnified...what a thought !

Regards, Phil

----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/1/2019 8:13:14 AM

Phil,

There is a quote from one of Lee's sons from after the war that he told them about Gettysburg that goes something like "I believed so much in the ability of the men that I set impossible tasks for them to achieve." That I whole heartedly believe Lee said and believed.

Do you really think a man who thought that would be satisfied enough with the results of Day 1 to walk away and go home?

You don't become a great commander who we study and discuss by only fighting when all the odds are in your favor and by going strictly by the book but every great commander has his Gettysburg or Cold harbor or Alesia or El Alimain because without their willingness to go against the odds and think outside of the box we wouldn't be calling them great and discussing them.

If Jackson was alive maybe its him that goes out West. Maybe Jackson and Forrest together would have shot Bragg.
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/1/2019 8:30:47 AM

John,

That’s a challenging reply....do I really think that Lee would have been content to walk away, content with the outcome of a triumphant day one ? No, he wouldn’t.....but the team of Jackson/Longstreet/Lee ( I’d better omit Stuart ! ) is going to operate more wisely than Lee did, deprived as he was of his right arm and the chemistry of the excellent previous teamwork that had sustained and prevailed in previous crises.

Lee suffered from the lack of a decent staff at Gettysburg. His health had deteriorated, his impulsive nature got the better of him, and Longstreet’s demeanour might have compounded the difficulties. I really do believe that Jackson, eccentric and difficult though he was, had some kind of calming influence on Lee. Apart from the tactical prowess that would secure the heights to the south of Gettysburg , I reckon the peculiar impact of his personality was bound to be every bit as important as the performance on the field.

I like to think about this kind of thing : many a time in my own life, I’ve sought reassurance from the company of certain people who - for whatever reason - have enhanced my confidence and enabled me to work better.
When those people have not been around me, I stumbled.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/1/2019 1:32:50 PM

Phil,

The "chemistry" was going to be altered no matter because all the evidence available points to Lee going to 3 Corps no matter Jackson's death or not. With Jackson alive there are new problems to the "chemistry" within the leadership in the corps and divisions depending on if its Hill or Ewell to command the new Corps.

I also have to disagree to the implication that the ANVA would have been better prepared when the "crisis" came if Jackson had been there. The "crisis" is when Buford is waiting for Harry Heath with the ANVA not yet concentrated. Jackson wouldn't have been against spreading out the army to gather the bounty of PA and spread the fear of God. In fact with him pushing it might be farther spread out. He wouldn't have been present to stop Heath from going to look for shoes. And it wasn't going to be his spy bringing the news that the AOP was a lot closer than believed to start a concentration. He might have arrested Iverson and O'Neil on the spot and chewed out Rhodes. Now if we are talking Days 2 & 3 I'm not sure there is much he could do. Rhodes and Early are pretty chewed up so Johnson is his only offensive force and he's not going to get Hood and Pickett on the field any earlier. Could have had held what Johnson had captured on Day 2?

Lee suffer from an inadequate staff since he took command to the day he surrendered the army. His health had been bad since before Sharpsburg. And with respect he didn't spend that much time around Jackson. It was Longstreet who's tents were pitched close on the march, who's HDQ was close in camp and who's campfire he visited most if he wanted to talk.

I hear what your saying I just think that Jackson isn't that guy for Lee.
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
morris crumley
Dunwoody
GA USA
Posts: 2358

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/1/2019 2:07:11 PM

I wouldn`t be putting much faith in Douglass Southall Freeman. Freeman was an unabashed Virginian who felt that the sun set with Lee and Jackson. Hell, he has Lee expecting an early attack from Longstreet on day 2...even though Lee himself had given permission for Longstreet to await Evander Law`s brigade.

Respects, Morris
----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/1/2019 3:25:30 PM

Morris,

That comes from I believe a post war Gov of Maryland and his very questionable report of a conversation with Lee and I believe in the notes at least Freeman does point out that it isn't accepted as reliable by all. Yes there is a VA bias but in all honesty I think he is a great base/starting point for those who want to learn about the ANVA and Lee.
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/2/2019 5:04:12 AM

John,

Would there have been a day two, let alone a day three, if Jackson had been there ?

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/2/2019 7:56:43 AM

Phil,

If he's there is 2nd Corps even more dispersed because he's pushed the march? Or is there even a battle there because he's pushed the march to concentrate and one of his divisions goes in with Heth and they overwhelm Buford before any infantry can come up? This is the problem with what ifs.


----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/2/2019 8:02:39 AM

Hey Phil and Morris and anybody else since we are talking Lee and Jackson here's a question. So how much of the concept/plan of the Valley Campaign is Lee and how much Jackson?
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/2/2019 9:56:32 AM

Quote:
Phil,

If he's there is 2nd Corps even more dispersed because he's pushed the march? Or is there even a battle there because he's pushed the march to concentrate and one of his divisions goes in with Heth and they overwhelm Buford before any infantry can come up? This is the problem with what ifs.



John,

For all his Old Testament fury, Jackson was a sagacious warrior, and, in my mind’s eye, I see him prevailing upon Lee and persuading him to withdraw while he’s ahead.

Longstreet was unable to do this : I think Jackson could.

What the outcome of the initial encounter might have been is, of course , anybody’s guess.....but I reckon it was not going to be a good day at the office for Meade.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
morris crumley
Dunwoody
GA USA
Posts: 2358

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/2/2019 4:23:42 PM

John, I would say that the concept was Lee`s, who saw an opportunity for an operation of maneuver, if utilized with "great speed" and a force kept "light" to keep the federals in the valley away from McClellan. A concept of Lee`s that was executed by Jackson with great attention to detail...right down to explicit directions for the process of march.

Respects, Morris


----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
morris crumley
Dunwoody
GA USA
Posts: 2358

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/5/2019 9:13:53 AM

The "what if gambit" spirals out in all directions, like water from the impact of a thrown rock.

If Longstreet is not struck down..then the flank attack on Hancock is pressed hard...the way Longstreet always followed up an attack. The damage done could have made Grant`s overland campaign even more stalled out than it would become anyway. What does that potentially mean?

Down in North Georgia, Sherman`s goal is not the capture of Atlanta, nor even the destruction of the railroads, or of the Army of Tennessee, his sole responsibility is to so occupy Johnston`s AOT as to render it incapable of providing reinforcements to Lee`s AONV. Indeed, it was only after he would receive the word from Grant`s stalled overland campaign, ( Petersburg) where Grant tells him to do what he must to achieve a victory on that front, that Sherman alters his objective. If Sherman is compelled to "force the issue" much sooner than he did, he may have committed the type of errors that even Johnston could not fail to take advantage of...and long before crossing the Chattahoochee, where the option of maneuver for Johnston`s army are severely limited.

The absence of Longstreet for the majority of Grant`s operation is a blow that can not be mediated. There is no doubt that, with Lee ill, AP Hill ill(as usual) and Ewell being Ewell being Ewell, the presence of Longstreet at North Anna River may well have made the difference in springing the trap that Lee had seen, and determined to take advantage of, to hammer one of two divided wings of the AOP. But, Longstreet was not there, and there was no one else.

Respects, Morris


----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 8/5/2019 1:24:19 PM

Morris,

This has certainly got me thinking.

Let me confess that I would have considered Jackson’s death as the pre-eminent misfortune to befall the South when it comes to the importance of individual military prowess.

Longstreet’s wounding never made the same impact on my perception of the course of the war.

Now I’m wobbling.

As you say, Lee was desperate to hit Grant in the period between Spotsylvania and Cold Harbor.

We must strike them a blow ! he railed as he lay stricken with diarrhoea ....to no avail. A chance was lost when the yankees were in a vulnerable predicament straddling a river. Longstreet was not there : the absence of one of the hardest hitting generals in American military annals was of inestimable importance at that juncture.

I have always been shocked by the dimension of the Union casualty list in the Wilderness . Some commentators have been remarkably complacent about the prodigality of that fighting, and, in a kind of statistical spin, have argued that Grant’s generalship compares favourably with Lee’s - and with other generals’ - when it comes to loss of life sustained. I find that preposterous when I survey the yankee death toll from the 5th and 6th of May : not only was the number immense, it also amounted to more than double the rebel fatalities, despite the fact that there was plenty of offensive action on the part of Lee’s men. I have to surmise that, had Longstreet not been struck down by friendly fire, the advantage was bound to be more cast in Lee’s favour . This was a much more lopsided fight than Chancellorsville, fought over the same ground one year earlier . The balance of loss was more weighted against the North in the 1864 battle ; the presence of Longstreet impinged here ; apart from the respective casualties, the impact on morale and on Grant’s strategic resolve, in the event of exploitation by an unscathed Longstreet, is certainly worthy of speculation.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
morris crumley
Dunwoody
GA USA
Posts: 2358

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/1/2019 11:34:39 AM

Quote:
Hey Phil and Morris and anybody else since we are talking Lee and Jackson here's a question. So how much of the concept/plan of the Valley Campaign is Lee and how much Jackson?



Hey John, I was very interested in an exchange about this.

Respects, Morris
----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
Gregory C. White
Canton
GA USA
Posts: 241

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/1/2019 4:55:44 PM

Jackson's death forced Lee to create a third corps. That alone should give some weight to Jackson over Longstreet. Having said that, would Lee have created a 3rd Corps if Longstreet had been killed @ Chancellorsville, and Jackson had lived to participate in the upcoming campaign?

I've often wondered if there would have been a battle @ Gettysburg if Jackson had commanded the 2nd Corps instead of Ewell. I'm thinking Harrisburg would have been sacked and the great battle of the war would have been fought elsewhere.

Fun to speculate.

Best Regards,

Greg
----------------------------------
"I do not believe that any man can adequately appreciate the world of to-day unless he has some knowledge of...[and] some feeling for...the history of the world of the past." Theodore Roosevelt
morris crumley
Dunwoody
GA USA
Posts: 2358

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/2/2019 12:04:34 PM

Greg, you certainly make a good point....about Lee having to form a 3rd corps after the loss of Jackson, and it`s impact giving greater weight to Jackson over Longstreet.

I would say that Lee was going to from a 3rd corps anyway. He had already expressed his belief that a corps of 20,000-to 25,000 men was too cumbersome and large for one to command. I would argue that it wasn`t the creation of a 3rd corps that turned out to be the problem...the problem was with who was chosen to command it...and Jackson`s old corps.

No doubt, had Jackson commanded the 2cd corps in Pennsylvania....things would have turned out much differently. Lee was also done in by the placement and alignment, and duties assigned the three corps resulted in his least experienced corps commanders......beginning the whole thing to start with, while his "old war horse" was blocked, and bringing up the rear by way of screening the mountain gaps and supply trains from the yanks.

Respects, Morris
----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/4/2019 9:31:37 AM

Morris,

The "concept" will only work with a stripped down, fast moving and hard hitting force and with respect given the state of training and the fact that the professionals in the officer corps are all three or four grades above the highest they have held in the "old Army" the only way to accomplish any mission is "great attention to detail." I also will add that the state of training and in the officer corps goes both ways.

My next question to you is don't you think Lee knew Jackson's reputation for hard assed training? Do you also think that Lee had knowledge and a feel for the kind of commanders were in the men leading the Union forces Jackson would confront?
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/4/2019 9:43:55 AM

Greg,

Lee was planning to create a 3rd Corps before Chancellorsville. See his correspondence with Davis all the previous winter.

Wasn't the Invalid Corps at Harrisburg? Wouldn't the ANVA have had to get across the Susquehanna to get at Harrisburg? Where are the pontoons coming from?
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
john hayward
Allenstown
NH USA
Posts: 614

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/6/2019 8:49:50 PM

One thing we are failing to note that would the Gettysburg Campaign have unfolded the same way up to the morning of July 1st if Jackson wasn't killed? Perhaps it is Jackson who is coming down the Chambersburg Pike that morning, not Hill. Or even Longstreet. Is ANV still divided into 2 Corps or is it 3? Commanded by Ewell or Hill?
Jackson's death on May 10 set a whole chain of events in motion that led to Gettysburg and its results.
Longstreet's wounding coming as it did slowed the Conf attack in the Wilderness but it is a reach to believe that the attack would have driven the AOP from the field. Grant was going to move south regardless


----------------------------------
"When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."
Steve Clements
Toronto
ON Canada
Posts: 611

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/12/2019 5:54:17 PM

Quote:
Longstreet's wounding coming as it did slowed the Conf attack in the Wilderness but it is a reach to believe that the attack would have driven the AOP from the field. Grant was going to move south regardless


Agree with this.

Someone with a better memory can help me here, but Longstreet's flank attack (organized by Sorell?) of maybe four or five brigades was NOT going to drive Grant from the field...and even without Longstreet's wounding, the attack had arguably accomplished just about all it could....as we have seen in many CW battles, short-term tactical advances were often as confusing to the victor as to the defeated.

s.c.
----------------------------------
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/17/2019 9:50:37 PM

Steve,

But Longstreet when wounded was in the process of putting another flank attack in motion against the position Hancock fell back to. The unfinished railroad offered a covered and unguarded approach to the flank and rear of that fall back position. He had sent a staff officer he brought back from the western adventure who had worn out his welcome with Bragg to scout the approach. Engineering officer I believe maybe a Maj or Lt Col but the name just won't come to me. Is a brand new to command Anderson going to take the risk of splitting his force in the face of the enemy as Old Pete did? No he didn't
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/18/2019 5:14:00 AM

Was Longstreet the hardest hitter of all Civil War generals at that level of command ?

I think he might have been.

Second Mannassas comes to mind. As for Gettysburg, the confederate failure there must not obscure the disproportionate damage that Longstreet’s two divisions inflicted in a few hours. Chickamauga was another Longstreet success.....although of course we have to countenance the fact that he was presented with an open door in the centre when that yankee division moved away.

My impression is that the rebel fighting prowess had reached a peak in the Wilderness, and that Longstreet’s wounding there prevented a truly ugly scenario developing for the yankees. It was grim enough as it was...with an unscathed Longstreet pressing ahead I’m tempted to envisage the “ Forward to Spotsylvania ! “ moment being removed from our history books.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
morris crumley
Dunwoody
GA USA
Posts: 2358

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/18/2019 7:23:30 AM

That unfinished railroad cut was scouted out by men from the 3rd Georgia Battalion Sharpshooters, who informed Wofford, who then sent word to HQ...at which time Longstreet dispatched a staff officer to investigate.

I don`t suggest that ,without Longstreet`s wounding, the situation at Wilderness would have completely been reversed...but clearly Longstreet`s wounding brought the end to any effective effort, and his removal from Lee for several critical months would have ramifications far beyond the action at Wilderness. There were as series of mistakes of disposition in the battles to come...and had Lee had Longstreet`s counsel.....well...we`ll never know how much a difference would have taken place.

Respects, Morris
----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/19/2019 1:52:05 AM

Phil,

At Chickamauga Longstreet commanded a Wing of the AOT, or basically half the army. Hood commanded Longstreet Corps and Law Hood's Division.

I don't know if I can name a "hardest hitting" corps commander. Maybe because I think Hardee and Hooker belong in the discussion. "Hardest hitting" to me doesn't automatically mean battle winning and so many attacks get tossed out like a baby with the bath water.

Funny that you mention Chickamauga. I was just doing some reading on the brigade and division commanders and while on one I thought now here is somebody Phil would enjoy, Do a search on the "Mad Cossack" and let me know what you think.
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/19/2019 12:56:13 PM

Very grateful to you, John, for that suggestion about a search on the “Mad Cossack”. Quite a curiosity. I wonder how American soldiers reacted to foreigners leading them in that war : pretty well, judging by the conduct of Turchin’s Brigade.

No word of a lie here, John, but I had been thinking about Hardee and Hooker, too. I’ve always been impressed by how badly Hooker chewed up the rebels in his opening attack at Antietam. I don’t know much about Hardee, but his reputation resonates with competence, and his battlefield skills were enhanced by a scholarly approach. He didn’t just read the manuals : he wrote them !

An aspect that intrigues me is the degree of toxicity that was apparent among higher commanders in the Civil War. How do Jackson and Longstreet compare in this regard ? I associate Jackson with some awful antagonisms, with a propensity to putting his fellow officers under arrest. He was more than harsh on Dick Garnett after Kernstown. As for Longstreet, there were some vituperative comments made about him, especially by Lafayette McLaws. The big confederate attack at Seven Pines was , I believe, damaged by some bloody minded behaviour on Longstreet’s part, although I don’t know the details. I’m inclined to think of him as one of the war’s best fighters : but there is something lurking in accounts that gives me pause. I think I’ll take another look at Knoxville and Fort Sanders, or revisit Bob Krick’s essays.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
scoucer
Berlin
 Germany
Posts: 2591

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/19/2019 4:30:57 PM

Quote:
I associate Jackson with some awful antagonisms, with a propensity to putting his fellow officers under arrest.

Regards, Phil


Ewell once remarked to a friend " What´s wrong with me `? Jackson hasn´t had me arrested. "

Trevor
----------------------------------
`Hey don´t the wars come easy and don´t the peace come hard`- Buffy Sainte-Marie Some swim with the stream. Some swim against the stream. Me - I´m stuck somewhere in the woods and can´t even find the stupid stream.
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/19/2019 5:53:59 PM

Phil,

Trevor beat me to the quote. With Garnett I've always been drawn to the idea that it was protecting his reputation per the "code" because it was the "Stonewall Brigade" whose officers and men were trained, taught and lead personally by Jackson and he didn't train them to retreat in any situation.

McLaws is defending himself and passing the blame off of himself. He bears more responsibility to see that his division has the tools needed to complete a mission than the corps commander. Seven Pines was doomed in part because Longstreet and another division commander, I want to say Holmes but again it just isn't coming with any certainty, got in a argument over who crossed a bridge first on the approach march and Longstreet won the argument when he was wrong and should have lost and waited to cross. Could what is "lurking" be the fact that soon after the war Longstreet took a job from Grant and became a Republican pissing off just about everybody in the South who left accounts of the war? To me the best account comes from the dedication ceremony of Lee's statue in Richmond which drew so many former officers and men of the ANVA. As the senior officers arrived at the reviewing stand the rank and file would raise a Rebel Yell to show their respect and admiration. When "Old Pete" showed up the yell was longer and louder than all the others by far. Aren't the men who you lead into battle the best judge?

Edit I checked it was Huger not Holmes and Longstreet also took a different road than Johnston wanted. But although Longstreet screwed up so did Johnston because the orders he gave were screwed up and contradictory plus be never informed Huger that Longstreet had been named one of three Wing Commanders and he was part of that wing.
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre
PA USA
Posts: 977

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/20/2019 1:37:32 AM

Phil,

Remember the scene from Gettysburg the movie when Lee is trying to explain to JEB that he let the army down and says how some in the army think he should face a court and JEB wants their names. Lee counters angerly that there is no time for that. All of them were born into and raised with this code of honor in which reputation was all important, a thing to be built and protected at all costs. Joe Johnston and his fight with Davis, Bragg and all his conflicts and Pemberton and the crap in the AOM all have it as a major part of the problems. I sometimes think that the main reason for Lee's success is his ability to deal with it and the dramas it caused.
----------------------------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country. "to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"
Phil Andrade
London
 UK
Posts: 4072

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/20/2019 9:38:12 AM

Quote:
I sometimes think that the main reason for Lee's success is his ability to deal with it and the dramas it caused.


Very much in agreement with you here, John.

I have been thinking about Albert Sydney Johnston in this regard, too : not that he was brilliant, but because he was perhaps the only western rebel general who could keep the unruly bunch of prima donnas working together.

Would it be fanciful to suggest that it was his wounding, rather than Jackson's or Longstreet's, that was most fatal to the Confederacy ?

Something to behold, isn't it, that all three woundings - two of them fatal - were the result of friendly fire ?

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
morris crumley
Dunwoody
GA USA
Posts: 2358

Whose wounding was more fatal to the Confederacy, Jackson, or Longstreet??
Posted on: 10/20/2019 10:48:31 AM

At Fair Oaks, or Seven Pines, the plan of march Johnston ordered was to use three roads leading out of Richmond, that would converge at the point of attack. To the north, Nine Mile Road...in the center...Williamsburg Rd... and to the south...Charles City Rd. Longstreet`s division was assigned Nine Mile Rd, but he was ranked by Smith..and he felt, as second in rank he should have more independence, so he requested he be allowed to shift to the right, using the Williamsburg Rd, ( which he did not mention to Johnston) where he would "rank' but could also add more force to the center of the attack and D H Hill.

In shifting his brigades, he cut across the path of Smith`s command which caused a delay.

Huger had to march a ways down the Williamsburg Rd in order to reach the turn onto the Charles City Rd, his assigned route of march. He found his column stuck behind Longstreet`s in the process of crossing a bridge over a rain-swollen creek. Huger protested....and Longstreet told him that he ranked him..and his men were there first. Clearly, Longstreet was new to command of a force as large as a division, and did not account in his thinking, at that time of the war, of the logistics and difficulties of a lack of proper co-ordination of forces on the march.

At Knoxville, in the case of Ft. Sanders, Longstreet did as he learned from Lee, get the men to a point of attack, decide the general details of the attack...then rely on subordinates to carry out the necessary details. McLaws was responsible for details such as providing ladders for use against the dirt and frozen water slopes of the fort, and of conducting a reconnaissance of the approach. While it is true that Longstreet was present along with McLaws when they observed a Federal soldier crossing the mote, and even Longstreet remarked that it did not appear to be deeper than the man`s waist or so, McLaws was still responsible for having ladders just in case it was deeper than it appeared to them to be. (It was, the soldier they observed was crossing over on a plank.)

At Chancellorsville, and Salem Church, Lee was kinda sorta in field command of the two Longstreet divisions that were present while their commander was at Suffolk. Lee became a bit peeved at McLaws actions then.

Respects, Morris
----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."

© 2019 - MilitaryHistoryOnline.com LLC